|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 10, 2017 5:26:58 GMT -5
Why don't you save us both the time of rehashing it and just go back a few pages and do some reading. feel free to ask questions, but please, don't continue to ask the same ones that have been asked over and over again. It seems like when discussions like this happen, people jump in half way through and ask questions and make comments that have been asked and made dozens of times already because they are too lazy to just go back and do some reading. Stop it. All I've asked you to do is to list the divisions that you feel were so much better than the AFC East. But, if you care to move on instead of answering this seemingly simple request, fine. TFB, I have a second question. Why the hell are you and I up at this hour?? LOL!! All the info is on the previous pages. I really don't want to re-post it all again. I'm ready to call it a night. I did a lot of holiday shopping today and got a lot of stuff done around the house as far as decorations and organizing goes. It's our turn to have Christmas morning brunch at our house this year so lots of stuff to get ready. There's only like 15 days left until Christmas, just blows my mind. Where does the time go? This is my time to unwind, doing some football reading on the internet and getting some stuff ordered off of amazon. I'll be up and ready for some football watching around 10 am! Have a good evening... morning!!
|
|
|
Post by texaspat on Dec 10, 2017 5:32:15 GMT -5
You too, my friend. Take care.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 10, 2017 8:14:38 GMT -5
Maybe you should bother to read all the posts here.. if you did you would know that nobody has made the claim that you and donholman are talking about. Furthermore, it's time for some of you to actually know what you are talking about before making silly comments. What else is silly is for you to comment about someone else's posts, you have had your share of personal attacks on here TP. Don't all of a sudden act like you have been the poster boy for being the perfect forum member, lol!! I take it that your the person who is claiming that the Patriots have had such a huge advantage in playing in the allegedly weak AFC East. Okay...perhaps you can enlighten us by listing the divisions that you feel were so much more superior to the AFC East over the past 16 years of the Patriots' Dynasty? Furthermore, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would make a greater effort to follow your own rules, and keep the personal attacks down to a minimum.I second, third, and fourth that statement. I looked at his last reply to coolade. It was rife with personal attacks. Nothing in it that specifically violated the rules such as calling the poster a "moron" or things like that, but damn close. The sum total of all the attacks in that reply, though, should at least warrant a warning from his alter ego (Admin). Thank you TP for calling him out on that. I guess when it is impossible to win an argument he, like many others, resorts to personal attacks. Aside from that, all one needs to do is to go my post where I posted the aggregate won-lost records for ALL the non-division winners in all out-of-division games for the past fifteen years. Over those 450 games, the AFC East came in third, just two games out of first. There were behind first place by only 0.006. That is the most definitive statement possible as to in which division do the winners have to face the stiffest competition in their own division. We have yet to hear from TFB12 to try to give ANY reason why those numbers (which are readily available on the internet for anyone to re-calculate as I did) are, in his words, "bullshit" or just how I am trying to "snow" people with them because I am "stubborn". Damn right I am stubborn. When I have definitive PROOF in the way of fifteen years worth of numbers backing me up, I can easily afford to be.
|
|
|
Post by agcsbill on Dec 10, 2017 8:25:22 GMT -5
Good point, if TB played in such a weak division, you might have to think twice about him being the GOAT. Had it too easy compared to the greatest. You cant have it both ways, say he plays in the weakest division, then claim he's the greatest. Probably put an asterisk when he enters the HOF. Played in the AFC East. That's the point, and the implication, of what TFB12 seems to be fighting for in his battle with Sheldon. He took a play right out of the hater book to diminish the Pats success all these years.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 10, 2017 8:28:28 GMT -5
I take it that your the person who is claiming that the Patriots have had such a huge advantage in playing in the allegedly weak AFC East. Okay...perhaps you can enlighten us by listing the divisions that you feel were so much more superior to the AFC East over the past 16 years of the Patriots' Dynasty? Furthermore, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would make a greater effort to follow your own rules, and keep the personal attacks down to a minimum.I second, third, and fourth that statement. I looked at his last reply to coolade. It was rife with personal attacks. Nothing in it that specifically violated the rules such as calling the poster a "moron" or things like that, but damn close. The sum total of all the attacks in that reply, though, should at least warrant a warning from his alter ego (Admin). Thank you TP for calling him out on that. I guess when it is impossible to win an argument he, like many others, resorts to personal attacks. Aside from that, all one needs to do is to go my post where I posted the aggregate won-lost records for ALL the non-division winners in all out-of-division games for the past fifteen years. Over those 450 games, the AFC East came in third, just two games out of first. There were behind first place by only 0.006. That is the most definitive statement possible as to in which division do the winners have to face the stiffest competition in their own division. We have yet to hear from TFB12 to try to give ANY reason why those numbers (which are readily available on the internet for anyone to re-calculate as I did) are, in his words, "bullshit" or just how I am trying to "snow" people with them because I am "stubborn". Damn right I am stubborn. When I have definitive PROOF in the way of fifteen years worth of numbers backing me up, I can easily afford to be. Something was bothering me as to why the AFC East did not add up to 450 games. I went back and checked and found that I had shorted it by one win in 2004. Here are the revised standings: #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCE 210-240 .467 (.4666)#3 AFCN 209-239 .467 (.4665) (two ties) #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196-254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 So, the AFC East is properly in second place, not third, by .0001 and is only .004 out of first (one game behind out of the 450 played). To all those in the "weak AFC East making it easy for the Pats" crowd, put that in your pipe and smoke it.
|
|
|
Post by agcsbill on Dec 10, 2017 8:31:19 GMT -5
Here are the actual results of the #2,#3 and #4 teams in each division for all out of division games for the years 2002 to 2016 in order of strongest runner-ups division. I give the W-L records and the win percentage (ties excluded) #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCN 209-239 .467 #3 AFCE 209-240 .465 #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196=254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 As is immediately evident we see that - The AFC East is the third strongest division of runner-ups
- The AFC East is only .006 behind the leader (two games out of 450)
- There isn't all that much difference among the first seven divisions (21 wins out of 450 games)
- The sad sack division is the NFC West
I repeat that these are the ACTUAL results for the W-L of all the non-division winners for all non-division games. The conclusively, beyond a shadow of doubt, PROVES that the AFC East competition for the Patriots has been almost the hardest in the league. Now I would like to see ANYONE challenge the OBVIOUS conclusion from these ACTUAL DATA and demonstrate why this is the not the single best statistic for measuring the competition for the division winners. Just because the Pats do so well against their own division and wins it so often does not make it a weak division. When the division winner, in most years, either sweeps or may have only one loss within that division most years, that impacts the W-L of the rest of the teams in that division. Many have pointed out the out of division stats, like you have, to counter the weak division contention. Unfortunately, this within the division domination implies a weak division and many run with that in order to diminish the Pats' success.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 10, 2017 8:43:50 GMT -5
I second, third, and fourth that statement. I looked at his last reply to coolade. It was rife with personal attacks. Nothing in it that specifically violated the rules such as calling the poster a "moron" or things like that, but damn close. The sum total of all the attacks in that reply, though, should at least warrant a warning from his alter ego (Admin). Thank you TP for calling him out on that. I guess when it is impossible to win an argument he, like many others, resorts to personal attacks. Aside from that, all one needs to do is to go my post where I posted the aggregate won-lost records for ALL the non-division winners in all out-of-division games for the past fifteen years. Over those 450 games, the AFC East came in third, just two games out of first. There were behind first place by only 0.006. That is the most definitive statement possible as to in which division do the winners have to face the stiffest competition in their own division. We have yet to hear from TFB12 to try to give ANY reason why those numbers (which are readily available on the internet for anyone to re-calculate as I did) are, in his words, "bullshit" or just how I am trying to "snow" people with them because I am "stubborn". Damn right I am stubborn. When I have definitive PROOF in the way of fifteen years worth of numbers backing me up, I can easily afford to be. Something was bothering me as to why the AFC East did not add up to 450 games. I went back and checked and found that I had shorted it by one win in 2004. Here are the revised standings: #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCE 210-240 .467 (.4666)#3 AFCN 209-239 .467 (.4665) (two ties) #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196-254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 So, the AFC East is properly in second place, not third, by .0001 and is only .004 out of first (one game behind out of the 450 played). To all those in the "weak AFC East making it easy for the Pats" crowd, put that in your pipe and smoke it. Out of curiosity I did it also for the results so far this year. Here are the standings: #1 NFCS 16-10 .615 #2 AFCE 12-10 .480#3 AFCS 10-13 .435 #4 NFCN 10-14 .417 #5 NFCW 9-13 .409 #6 AFCW 9-16 .391 #7 NFCE 9-15 .375 #8 AFCN 8-16 .333 So, thus far this year the NFCS is the runaway winner with the AFCE coming in second place. So much for "weak AFC East" ever since 2002! Nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by agcsbill on Dec 10, 2017 8:44:04 GMT -5
Maybe you should bother to read all the posts here.. if you did you would know that nobody has made the claim that you and donholman are talking about. Furthermore, it's time for some of you to actually know what you are talking about before making silly comments. What else is silly is for you to comment about someone else's posts, you have had your share of personal attacks on here TP. Don't all of a sudden act like you have been the poster boy for being the perfect forum member, lol!! I take it that your the person who is claiming that the Patriots have had such a huge advantage in playing in the allegedly weak AFC East. Okay...perhaps you can enlighten us by listing the divisions that you feel were so much more superior to the AFC East over the past 16 years of the Patriots' Dynasty? Furthermore, I'd greatly appreciate it if you would make a greater effort to follow your own rules, and keep the personal attacks down to a minimum. Here is what is happening: Because the Patriots, compared to the rest of the NFL, wins its division so consistently, there has to be something wrong with the other teams in that division. Therefore, someone comes up with the theory it must be due to the fact the other teams in the division are inherently bad teams, have been that way for over 15 consecutive years, and therefore the division is a weak division. If the Patriots success is to be the result of simply winning in a weak division year after year, why does it get to the AFCCG and the SB so often? If their division is so weak, and as a result their record if fluffed up by playing in that division, once it gets outside of that division the Pats shouldn't be able to win as much. But, the Pats do, therefore the Pats success is not just due to playing in a weak division because it also repeatedly beats up on the rest of the AFC year after year. If has nothing to do about a weak division. End of discussion!!!
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 10, 2017 8:50:31 GMT -5
Here are the actual results of the #2,#3 and #4 teams in each division for all out of division games for the years 2002 to 2016 in order of strongest runner-ups division. I give the W-L records and the win percentage (ties excluded) #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCN 209-239 .467 #3 AFCE 209-240 .465 #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196=254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 As is immediately evident we see that - The AFC East is the third strongest division of runner-ups
- The AFC East is only .006 behind the leader (two games out of 450)
- There isn't all that much difference among the first seven divisions (21 wins out of 450 games)
- The sad sack division is the NFC West
I repeat that these are the ACTUAL results for the W-L of all the non-division winners for all non-division games. The conclusively, beyond a shadow of doubt, PROVES that the AFC East competition for the Patriots has been almost the hardest in the league. Now I would like to see ANYONE challenge the OBVIOUS conclusion from these ACTUAL DATA and demonstrate why this is the not the single best statistic for measuring the competition for the division winners. Just because the Pats do so well against their own division and wins it so often does not make it a weak division. When the division winner, in most years, either sweeps or may have only one loss within that division most years, that impacts the W-L of the rest of the teams in that division. Many have pointed out the out of division stats, like you have, to counter the weak division contention. Unfortunately, this within the division domination implies a weak division and many run with that in order to diminish the Pats' success. Which is why scientists, like me, rely on NUMBERS and not "seems like" to prove or disprove a theory. The theory of weak division opponents has been totally discredited by the out-of-division results that I posted for now the last 17 years. In fact, if you were to include the totals for this year to date into the 2002-2016 results, the AFC East would be the division with the STRONGEST contenders. Yes, they would be in FIRST place -- by two games.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2017 9:10:27 GMT -5
Good Job Sheldon! That's how I look at it too. Outside the Division determines it for me too. You know your playing each year 6 games, within the Division, those are always tough games. When you play different Opponents that you never see, will give you better gage, if Division is weak. 1 game is better to see who's better, then 2 games, they can cancel each other out. 1 is final, it's either a win, or loss.
|
|
bostate
3rd String but playing on Special Teams
Posts: 996
Likes: 466
|
Post by bostate on Dec 10, 2017 9:26:14 GMT -5
Several possible reasons for the Pats success:
1) they fill their footballs with nitrogen oxide which gives them an impercievable specific gravity advantage. (Most popular)
2) Secret sauce prepared by Ernie Adams
3) Extra income earned by Giselle allows TB to have to make fewer commercials than other top quarterbacks
4) they are the best team most of the time (least popular)
BTW. Great work Sheldon. ............ but how is this better than uninformed opinion?
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Dec 10, 2017 9:28:59 GMT -5
There's always a reason why the Patriots "suck"... it can't simply be that they're just good.
If the Patriots were only good because of the AFC East then their record against non division opponents would be worse... it's not.
Negative Nancy's... get a grip. The Patriots have just been that good. Stop acting like self hating clowns.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Dec 10, 2017 9:37:35 GMT -5
There's always a reason why the Patriots "suck"... it can't simply be that they're just good. If the Patriots were only good because of the AFC East then their record against non division opponents would be worse... it's not. Negative Nancy's... get a grip. The Patriots have just been that good. Stop acting like self hating clowns. Tom Brady's record up to 2016... Vs. the AFC East: 66-20 (.767) Vs. the AFC North: 25-7 (.781) Vs. the AFC South: 33-6 (.846) Vs. the AFC West: 22-14 (.611) Vs. the NFC East: 14-5 (.737) Vs. the NFC North: 14-3 (.824) Vs. the NFC South: 13-3 (.813) Vs. the NFC West: 7-4 (.636) Fun Fact: Brady has never lost to Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Jacksonville, Minnesota and Tampa Bay, combined 26-0 vs. those 6 teams. So much for that horsesht argument...
|
|
bostate
3rd String but playing on Special Teams
Posts: 996
Likes: 466
|
Post by bostate on Dec 10, 2017 9:54:28 GMT -5
There's always a reason why the Patriots "suck"... it can't simply be that they're just good. If the Patriots were only good because of the AFC East then their record against non division opponents would be worse... it's not. Negative Nancy's... get a grip. The Patriots have just been that good. Stop acting like self hating clowns. Tom Brady's record up to 2016... Vs. the AFC East: 66-20 (.767) Vs. the AFC North: 25-7 (.781) Vs. the AFC South: 33-6 (.846) Vs. the AFC West: 22-14 (.611) Vs. the NFC East: 14-5 (.737) Vs. the NFC North: 14-3 (.824) Vs. the NFC South: 13-3 (.813) Vs. the NFC West: 7-4 (.636) Fun Fact: Brady has never lost to Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Jacksonville, Minnesota and Tampa Bay, combined 26-0 vs. those 6 teams. So much for that horsesht argument... So Tommy’s worst winning percentage is against the two western divisions. Now we know his weakness. Next the League will schedule them to play the Seahawks in Tokyo. Kraft buys the Concorde. Paints 6 Lombardi’s on the tail.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 10, 2017 10:39:11 GMT -5
Tom Brady's record up to 2016... Vs. the AFC East: 66-20 (.767) Vs. the AFC North: 25-7 (.781) Vs. the AFC South: 33-6 (.846) Vs. the AFC West: 22-14 (.611) Vs. the NFC East: 14-5 (.737) Vs. the NFC North: 14-3 (.824) Vs. the NFC South: 13-3 (.813) Vs. the NFC West: 7-4 (.636) Fun Fact: Brady has never lost to Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Jacksonville, Minnesota and Tampa Bay, combined 26-0 vs. those 6 teams. So much for that horsesht argument... So Tommy’s worst winning percentage is against the two western divisions. Now we know his weakness. Next the League will schedule them to play the Seahawks in Tokyo. Kraft buys the Concorde. Paints 6 Lombardi’s on the tail. More significantly, those are the only two where he has a lower winning percentages than against his own division. He does better against the other five. Also, strangely, those are the divisions ranked #6 and a pitiful #8. Also, of note, against his own division it is almost always against #2, #3 and #4 each twice. Whereas outside of the division it is #1 (four times) and each of the others two each. That makes it all the more amazing, doesn't it, adding four #1s into the mix? Yeah, yeah, yeah. It wasn't every year. It was only 13 of the 15 years he played all or almost all of the season.
|
|
bostate
3rd String but playing on Special Teams
Posts: 996
Likes: 466
|
Post by bostate on Dec 10, 2017 12:29:01 GMT -5
Here are the actual results of the #2,#3 and #4 teams in each division for all out of division games for the years 2002 to 2016 in order of strongest runner-ups division. I give the W-L records and the win percentage (ties excluded) #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCN 209-239 .467 #3 AFCE 209-240 .465 #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196=254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 As is immediately evident we see that - The AFC East is the third strongest division of runner-ups
- The AFC East is only .006 behind the leader (two games out of 450)
- There isn't all that much difference among the first seven divisions (21 wins out of 450 games)
- The sad sack division is the NFC West
I repeat that these are the ACTUAL results for the W-L of all the non-division winners for all non-division games. The conclusively, beyond a shadow of doubt, PROVES that the AFC East competition for the Patriots has been almost the hardest in the league. Now I would like to see ANYONE challenge the OBVIOUS conclusion from these ACTUAL DATA and demonstrate why this is the not the single best statistic for measuring the competition for the division winners. OK. I’ll challange the obvious conclusion and then refute my argument. (You won’t see that on cable news) The AFCE record in this table is skewed by including the Pats record against non division opponents. The Pats don’t play themselves so their record shouldn’t be included when measuring the strength of their division opponents. OTOH, the reason the Pats record skews the division record is because the Pats have beat the p!ss out of non division opponents as well as division opponents. The Pats just beat everybody, it doesn’t mater what division they are in. Sheldon, I know you will tell me where I went wrong, but I have to go do some stuff. I’ll check in later.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 10, 2017 17:19:45 GMT -5
There's always a reason why the Patriots "suck"... it can't simply be that they're just good. If the Patriots were only good because of the AFC East then their record against non division opponents would be worse... it's not. Negative Nancy's... get a grip. The Patriots have just been that good. Stop acting like self hating clowns. Who’s saying the Pats suck? I proved the rest of the division actually suck. So once again, who says the Pats suck?
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Dec 10, 2017 18:41:36 GMT -5
Who’s saying the Pats suck? I proved the rest of the division actually suck. So once again, who says the Pats suck? If the AFC East sucks then Brady pads his stats and has worse stats against the other divisions, facts show that not to be true. Sorry if it doesn't fit your agenda.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 10, 2017 18:45:13 GMT -5
Here are the actual results of the #2,#3 and #4 teams in each division for all out of division games for the years 2002 to 2016 in order of strongest runner-ups division. I give the W-L records and the win percentage (ties excluded) #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCN 209-239 .467 #3 AFCE 209-240 .465 #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196=254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 As is immediately evident we see that - The AFC East is the third strongest division of runner-ups
- The AFC East is only .006 behind the leader (two games out of 450)
- There isn't all that much difference among the first seven divisions (21 wins out of 450 games)
- The sad sack division is the NFC West
I repeat that these are the ACTUAL results for the W-L of all the non-division winners for all non-division games. The conclusively, beyond a shadow of doubt, PROVES that the AFC East competition for the Patriots has been almost the hardest in the league. Now I would like to see ANYONE challenge the OBVIOUS conclusion from these ACTUAL DATA and demonstrate why this is the not the single best statistic for measuring the competition for the division winners. There are so many different things that can skew your data and make your argument totally bogus. I’ll give you a few and then use an example to blow the crap out of your argument. Sure, if all teams played against all the conferences year after year then your data would be able to accurately prove what conferences were the strongest and weakest... but they don’t. Each conference plays two different conferences a year plus two teams from two different conferences. How the hell can you use those numbers to support your argument?? You can’t. Your argument is blown to shit right there. Let me just go a bit further... I just randomly picked a year... 2012 The AFC East All played the AFC South. Jets went 2-2, Bills went 1-3 and Dolphins went 1-3. They all played The NFC West. Jets went 2-2, Dolphins went 2-2 and the Bills 1-3. So right off the bat in 2012 the AFC East is worse than the 2 divisions that they all went head to head in. But even though that favors my argument, it’s just a plain mess and not a very accurate way to try and prove your theory let alone any theory. Sorry bud, but your theory is totally bogus. Flat out bogus. This has to be the dumbest way to try and prove the argument. The goal is to win Super Bowls. To get to the super bowl you gotta get to the playoffs. The Bills Jets and Dolphins have made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED in the last 10 years. That is worse than any other conference in the NFL. PERIOD! No debate about it. That’s weak sauce dude. Go back to the drawing board, stop trying to baffle us with your bullshit because it doesn’t work.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 10, 2017 18:54:41 GMT -5
Who’s saying the Pats suck? I proved the rest of the division actually suck. So once again, who says the Pats suck? If the AFC East sucks then Brady pads his stats and has worse stats against the other divisions, facts show that not to be true. Sorry if it doesn't fit your agenda. Do you know how to read Wozzy? I have already said that the Pats could dominate other divisions. Maybe they go to 2 less Super Bowls or maybe not. This whole discussion is about weak divisions. Seriously, so many of you don’t like what my info shows that you get so butthurt that you end up arguing the wrong argument. Go back and read my posts so that you know what you are arguing about. My gosh, get a freaking clue, dude. Let me repeat myself... the Jets, Bills and Dolphins have only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED in the past 10 years. That is worse than any other division in the NFL and it’s not even close. That is what us objective people call FACTS. Try and disbute that... Wozzy.
|
|
|
Post by Wozzy on Dec 10, 2017 19:03:55 GMT -5
Do you know how to read Wozzy? I have already said that the Pats could dominate other divisions. Maybe they go to 2 less Super Bowls or maybe not. This whole discussion is about weak divisions. Seriously, so many of you don’t like what my info shows that you get so butthurt that you end up arguing the wrong argument. Go back and read my posts so that you know what you are arguing about. My gosh, get a freaking clue, dude. Let me repeat myself... the Jets, Bills and Dolphins have only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED in the past 10 years. That is worse than any other division in the NFL and it’s not even close. That is what us objective people call FACTS. Try and disbute that... Wozzy. The best team in the NFL for the last two decades is the Patriots, the teams in the AFC East have to play us twice. It's hard to make the wildcard when you play the best team twice a year, thats two guaranteed losses. By default your premise means that the other divisions play the Pats tougher because they're "better." Again, this proves not to be true. If you wonder why so many of us point out why you're wrong it's because you're wrong... if facts stand for anything. Win percentage is the stat to look at because there are only two wild card spots available. This isn't a debate, facts prove you wrong.
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Dec 10, 2017 20:39:51 GMT -5
Do you know how to read Wozzy? I have already said that the Pats could dominate other divisions. Maybe they go to 2 less Super Bowls or maybe not. This whole discussion is about weak divisions. Seriously, so many of you don’t like what my info shows that you get so butthurt that you end up arguing the wrong argument. Go back and read my posts so that you know what you are arguing about. My gosh, get a freaking clue, dude. Let me repeat myself... the Jets, Bills and Dolphins have only made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED in the past 10 years. That is worse than any other division in the NFL and it’s not even close. That is what us objective people call FACTS. Try and disbute that... Wozzy. The best team in the NFL for the last two decades is the Patriots, the teams in the AFC East have to play us twice. It's hard to make the wildcard when you play the best team twice a year, thats two guaranteed losses. By default your premise means that the other divisions play the Pats tougher because they're "better." Again, this proves not to be true. If you wonder why so many of us point out why you're wrong it's because you're wrong... if facts stand for anything. Win percentage is the stat to look at because there are only two wild card spots available. This isn't a debate, facts prove you wrong. The Packers have been to the playoffs 9 times in the past 10 seasons, they are the best team in their division and the rest of their division has made the playoffs 8 times in 10 years.. that’s twice as many times that the Jets, Dolphins and Bills have made the playoffs COMBINED. the Steelers have been to the playoffs 7 times in the past 10 years, 2 less than the Pats and the Ravens, Bengals and Browns have been to the playoffs 12 times in the last 10 years, that 3 times the amount of times the Jets, Dolphins and Bills have been. This couldn’t be more evident which division, outside of the division leaders, are the weakest. Seriously, are you saying the Jets, Bills and Dolphins are better than the Ravens, Bengals and Browns or the Vikings, Lions Bears or how about the Saints, Panthers, Bucs? Oh hell no!! I could go on but I would just embarrass you even more.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 10, 2017 20:45:35 GMT -5
Here are the actual results of the #2,#3 and #4 teams in each division for all out of division games for the years 2002 to 2016 in order of strongest runner-ups division. I give the W-L records and the win percentage (ties excluded) #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCN 209-239 .467 #3 AFCE 209-240 .465 #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196=254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 As is immediately evident we see that - The AFC East is the third strongest division of runner-ups
- The AFC East is only .006 behind the leader (two games out of 450)
- There isn't all that much difference among the first seven divisions (21 wins out of 450 games)
- The sad sack division is the NFC West
I repeat that these are the ACTUAL results for the W-L of all the non-division winners for all non-division games. The conclusively, beyond a shadow of doubt, PROVES that the AFC East competition for the Patriots has been almost the hardest in the league. Now I would like to see ANYONE challenge the OBVIOUS conclusion from these ACTUAL DATA and demonstrate why this is the not the single best statistic for measuring the competition for the division winners. OK. I’ll challange the obvious conclusion and then refute my argument. (You won’t see that on cable news) The AFCE record in this table is skewed by including the Pats record against non division opponents. The Pats don’t play themselves so their record shouldn’t be included when measuring the strength of their division opponents. OTOH, the reason the Pats record skews the division record is because the Pats have beat the p!ss out of non division opponents as well as division opponents. The Pats just beat everybody, it doesn’t mater what division they are in. Sheldon, I know you will tell me where I went wrong, but I have to go do some stuff. I’ll check in later. You misunderstood. Those stats do not include division winners in any of the divisions. They are only for the second, third and fourth place teams so the Patriots are only in it for2002 and 2008.
|
|
|
Post by Shelly on Dec 10, 2017 21:00:10 GMT -5
Here are the actual results of the #2,#3 and #4 teams in each division for all out of division games for the years 2002 to 2016 in order of strongest runner-ups division. I give the W-L records and the win percentage (ties excluded) #1 NFCE 211-237 .471 #2 AFCN 209-239 .467 #3 AFCE 209-240 .465 #4 NFCS 204-246 .453 #5 AFCS 198-252 .440 #6 AFCW 196=254 .436 #7 NFCN 190-260 .422 #8 NFCW 166-284 .369 As is immediately evident we see that - The AFC East is the third strongest division of runner-ups
- The AFC East is only .006 behind the leader (two games out of 450)
- There isn't all that much difference among the first seven divisions (21 wins out of 450 games)
- The sad sack division is the NFC West
I repeat that these are the ACTUAL results for the W-L of all the non-division winners for all non-division games. The conclusively, beyond a shadow of doubt, PROVES that the AFC East competition for the Patriots has been almost the hardest in the league. Now I would like to see ANYONE challenge the OBVIOUS conclusion from these ACTUAL DATA and demonstrate why this is the not the single best statistic for measuring the competition for the division winners. There are so many different things that can skew your data and make your argument totally bogus. I’ll give you a few and then use an example to blow the crap out of your argument. Sure, if all teams played against all the conferences year after year then your data would be able to accurately prove what conferences were the strongest and weakest... but they don’t. Each conference plays two different conferences a year plus two teams from two different conferences. How the hell can you use those numbers to support your argument?? You can’t. Your argument is blown to shit right there. Let me just go a bit further... I just randomly picked a year... 2012 The AFC East All played the AFC South. Jets went 2-2, Bills went 1-3 and Dolphins went 1-3. They all played The NFC West. Jets went 2-2, Dolphins went 2-2 and the Bills 1-3. So right off the bat in 2012 the AFC East is worse than the 2 divisions that they all went head to head in. But even though that favors my argument, it’s just a plain mess and not a very accurate way to try and prove your theory let alone any theory. Sorry bud, but your theory is totally bogus. Flat out bogus. This has to be the dumbest way to try and prove the argument. The goal is to win Super Bowls. To get to the super bowl you gotta get to the playoffs. The Bills Jets and Dolphins have made the playoffs 4 times COMBINED in the last 10 years. That is worse than any other conference in the NFL. PERIOD! No debate about it. That’s weak sauce dude. Go back to the drawing board, stop trying to baffle us with your bullshit because it doesn’t work. I would say nice try but it isn't. Over 15 years those things average out. Fifteen years is a large enough sample. The point is clear as day. When you look at how your also rans measure up against all the others, and that is done by out of division games,then you know where you stand. Try again because your attention is a total failure. I'll say this for you though. At least you tried so I will remove the coward label. BTW, I am sorry you find actual numbers and statistics baffling. Also the only bullshit I see is your pathetic attempts to hold onto your inalid statement.
|
|
bostate
3rd String but playing on Special Teams
Posts: 996
Likes: 466
|
Post by bostate on Dec 10, 2017 21:00:21 GMT -5
OK. I’ll challange the obvious conclusion and then refute my argument. (You won’t see that on cable news) The AFCE record in this table is skewed by including the Pats record against non division opponents. The Pats don’t play themselves so their record shouldn’t be included when measuring the strength of their division opponents. OTOH, the reason the Pats record skews the division record is because the Pats have beat the p!ss out of non division opponents as well as division opponents. The Pats just beat everybody, it doesn’t mater what division they are in. Sheldon, I know you will tell me where I went wrong, but I have to go do some stuff. I’ll check in later. You misunderstood. Those stats do not include division winners in any of the divisions. They are only for the second, third and fourth place teams so the Patriots are only in it for2002 and 2008. Good job Sheldon.
|
|